Involving Knowledge Users in Health Services Research: Collective Reflections and Learning From a National Evaluation of Recurrent Miscarriage Services

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Marita Hennessy, Rebecca Dennehy, Hannah O'Leary, Keelin O'Donoghue, RE:CURRENT Research Advisory Group
{"title":"Involving Knowledge Users in Health Services Research: Collective Reflections and Learning From a National Evaluation of Recurrent Miscarriage Services","authors":"Marita Hennessy,&nbsp;Rebecca Dennehy,&nbsp;Hannah O'Leary,&nbsp;Keelin O'Donoghue,&nbsp;RE:CURRENT Research Advisory Group","doi":"10.1111/hex.70125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Involving knowledge users in research can facilitate the translation of evidence into policy and practice. How to best involve and support various types of knowledge users, including patient and public involvement contributors, in research is an identified knowledge gap. We conducted a national evaluation of recurrent miscarriage care supported by a Research Advisory Group (convened in March 2020) comprising a range of knowledge users, including parent advocates and people involved in the management/provision of services. The Group met virtually nine times, and actively collaborated beyond this on various research activities across the project. In this paper, we share insights from our collective evaluation of these involvement efforts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We drew on records kept over the timespan of the project to describe involvement activities and experiences. Advisory Group members participated in an electronic survey to assess their involvement experiences at two time points (February 2021 and May 2022); we analysed the results descriptively. In May 2022, we hosted a virtual World Café, comprising the Research Team and Advisory Group, to explore what worked well and what could have been improved regarding involvement activities within the project; we analysed this data thematically.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Responses to both rounds of the survey were positive, with people reporting: their ability to discuss research issues, contribute to the research, express their own views; feeling valued as a partner; that they could bring their own ideas and values to the research; perceived potential to gain status, expertise, or credibility because of their involvement. Themes constructed from the Word Café discussions highlighted that structural and relational spaces shaped the accessibility and experience of involvement.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Members reported a positive and rewarding experience with a visible impact on the research process but highlighted issues with the feasibility and scope of the research protocol and challenges to autonomous involvement in aspects reliant on clinical expertise. Our analysis reinforces that the relational nature of involvement takes precedence over instrumental aspects or techniques. Realistic study protocols that allow time and space for the evolving nature of research with knowledge users, and institutional and financial support to facilitate meaningful involvement, are needed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>People with lived experience of recurrent miscarriage/pregnancy loss were involved in this evaluation—as members of the RE:CURRENT Research Advisory Group, contributing to the methodology, evaluation activities, interpretation and reporting of findings and insights.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"27 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hex.70125","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70125","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Involving knowledge users in research can facilitate the translation of evidence into policy and practice. How to best involve and support various types of knowledge users, including patient and public involvement contributors, in research is an identified knowledge gap. We conducted a national evaluation of recurrent miscarriage care supported by a Research Advisory Group (convened in March 2020) comprising a range of knowledge users, including parent advocates and people involved in the management/provision of services. The Group met virtually nine times, and actively collaborated beyond this on various research activities across the project. In this paper, we share insights from our collective evaluation of these involvement efforts.

Methods

We drew on records kept over the timespan of the project to describe involvement activities and experiences. Advisory Group members participated in an electronic survey to assess their involvement experiences at two time points (February 2021 and May 2022); we analysed the results descriptively. In May 2022, we hosted a virtual World Café, comprising the Research Team and Advisory Group, to explore what worked well and what could have been improved regarding involvement activities within the project; we analysed this data thematically.

Results

Responses to both rounds of the survey were positive, with people reporting: their ability to discuss research issues, contribute to the research, express their own views; feeling valued as a partner; that they could bring their own ideas and values to the research; perceived potential to gain status, expertise, or credibility because of their involvement. Themes constructed from the Word Café discussions highlighted that structural and relational spaces shaped the accessibility and experience of involvement.

Conclusion

Members reported a positive and rewarding experience with a visible impact on the research process but highlighted issues with the feasibility and scope of the research protocol and challenges to autonomous involvement in aspects reliant on clinical expertise. Our analysis reinforces that the relational nature of involvement takes precedence over instrumental aspects or techniques. Realistic study protocols that allow time and space for the evolving nature of research with knowledge users, and institutional and financial support to facilitate meaningful involvement, are needed.

Patient or Public Contribution

People with lived experience of recurrent miscarriage/pregnancy loss were involved in this evaluation—as members of the RE:CURRENT Research Advisory Group, contributing to the methodology, evaluation activities, interpretation and reporting of findings and insights.

Abstract Image

让知识使用者参与医疗服务研究:复发性流产服务国家评估的集体反思与学习》(Collective Reflections and Learning From a National Evaluation of Recurrent Miscarriage Services)。
导言:让知识使用者参与研究有助于将证据转化为政策和实践。如何以最佳方式让各类知识使用者(包括患者和公众参与贡献者)参与研究并为其提供支持是一个已确定的知识缺口。我们对复发性流产护理进行了全国性评估,并得到了研究咨询小组(于 2020 年 3 月召集)的支持,该小组由一系列知识使用者组成,包括家长代言人和参与管理/提供服务的人员。该小组召开了九次虚拟会议,并在此基础上就整个项目的各种研究活动积极开展合作。在本文中,我们将分享我们对这些参与工作的集体评估所得出的见解:我们利用项目期间的记录来描述参与活动和经历。顾问组成员参与了一项电子调查,以评估他们在两个时间点(2021 年 2 月和 2022 年 5 月)的参与体验;我们对结果进行了描述性分析。2022 年 5 月,我们举办了一次由研究小组和顾问小组组成的虚拟世界咖啡馆,探讨项目内的参与活动哪些方面行之有效,哪些方面可以改进;我们对这些数据进行了专题分析:对两轮调查的答复都是积极的,人们报告说:他们有能力讨论研究问题、为研究做出贡献、表达自己的观点;感觉自己作为合作伙伴很有价值;他们可以为研究带来自己的想法和价值观;认为自己有可能因为参与研究而获得地位、专业知识或信誉。从 "文字咖啡馆 "讨论中得出的主题突出表明,结构空间和关系空间决定了参与的可及性和体验:成员们报告了积极有益的体验,对研究过程产生了明显的影响,但也强调了研究方案的可行性和范围问题,以及在依赖临床专业知识的方面自主参与所面临的挑战。我们的分析强化了参与的关系性优先于工具性或技术性。我们需要切合实际的研究方案,为知识使用者不断发展的研究性质留出时间和空间,并为促进有意义的参与提供机构和资金支持:患者或公众的贡献:有过复发性流产/妊娠损失经历的人作为 RE:CURRENT 研究咨询小组的成员参与了此次评估,对评估方法、评估活动、结果和见解的解释和报告做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Expectations
Health Expectations 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
9.40%
发文量
251
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including: • Person-centred care and quality improvement • Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management • Public perceptions of health services • Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting • Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation • Empowerment and consumerism • Patients'' role in safety and quality • Patient and public role in health services research • Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信